SF’s latest “Trojan Horse of Equality” spotted in Mid Ulster…

Here’s Sinn Fein Councillor Sean McGuigan explaining his party’s decision in the new Mid Ulster supercouncil to ban the sale of the poppy on council premises:

“We wanted to create an environment of equality and neutrality in council-owned facilities.  This interim arrangement will cover the sale and display of all symbols, including poppies and Easter Lilies, at all council buildings. This is part of Sinn Féin’s ongoing commitment to equality.”

Elsewhere, of course, Sinn Fein is firmly committed to its other policy of some (‘us’) being more equal than others (‘themuns’)

The decision is pending an equality impact assessment which is due in April… Although judging by the way the party has treated such judgements in the past, any inconveniences may be completely ignored…

, ,

  • PaulT

    sorry fella, you can’t collapse Stormont without breaching the GFA, so it’s either Stormont or a new agreement, and Nationalists would not agree to a lesser deal.

    So I guess the outworking of a permanent collapse of Stormont would be a border poll, I think republicans would probably accept that, esp considering how Scotland turned out.

    And that was keeping the OO and NI unionists under wraps, imagine the PR disaster for the UK with the those loons on the telly everyday waving a union flag

  • PaulT

    Didn’t SF become the biggest party in NI through number of votes at the local elections during the welfare reform period.

    I think SF are looking forward to the general election more than the DUP, heck Peter is a deadman walking at the moment, has anyone heard from him recently

  • PaulT

    So the First Minister didn’t know that the gun attack he led on a Garda Station was illegal

    And then there’s the clips of the Doc claiming during an interview that UR would shot anyone interfering with NI

    And then there is the missing weapons, UR haven’t decommissioned yet (and Pete still gets to be FM)

  • mickfealty

    I merely pointed out the discrepancy between Omagh’s decision in Dromore, this decision in New Mid Ulster and Newry. It’s not a negative, it’s just a party trying to game the equality system.

    It does no one any harm to point it up. Rather more damage is done by ignoring the problem. In that respect it’s far from negative.

  • Neil

    SF advocate neutrality

    That means nothing. As a sentence I mean. Where do they advocate neutrality? Obviously not on gable walls in Beechmount, or at orange order parades. You see, you’ll need a few qualifiers in there to make it mean anything.

    SF advocate neutrality in [insert place name here]

    No one is advocating neutrality across all communities, everywhere. Probably to avoid being laughed at. So we’ll have proof in the form of a link to this advocation of neutrality you’re banging on about.

    I was labouring under the impression that SF wanted to hoist the Irish national flag over city hall myself, which doesn’t instantly conjure up images of neutrality in my mind. The SDLP on the other hand…

  • mickfealty

    Not at all Niall, I’m fed up with eejits, and as you so tenderly put it, ‘boiling p***’ got up as comment. A better gardener would probably not have let the weeds get so far out of hand before taking the bill hook to them.

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    “We need to respect the right of all citizens to celebrate one’s culture and identity in an acceptable manner, while recognising and respecting the perceptions of those who
    may view such displays as overtly sectarian, intimidating and indeed threatening in nature.
    Failure to do so, perpetuates division and instability.”

    http://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2013/Sinn_Fe%CC%81in_Submisssion_on_Flags_Emblems_Symbols_15.10_.13_.pdf

    pg 2, paragraph 3

    The ‘perceptions’ part is clearly at odds with McCreesh.

    “We wanted to create an environment of equality and neutrality in council-owned facilities.”

    “This is part of Sinn Féin’s ongoing commitment to equality.”

    http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/33887

    The third line from the bottom fits neatly into the qualifier that you highlighted:

    YOU: “SF advocate neutrality in [insert place name here]”

    SF: “”We wanted to create an environment of equality and neutrality in council-owned facilities”

    THEREFORE: SF advocate neutrality in [council owned facilities].

    McCreesh park is a council owned facility.

  • Glenn Clare

    You do not buy a poppy you give a charitable donation to the
    poppy appeal, and what if it celebrates all wars and conflicts from WWI. Was
    there not Security Service personnel injured and killed in Northern Ireland by
    various terror groups including but not exclusively Sinn Fein/IRA.

    So now because of Sinn Fein/IRA’s ingrained hate they want
    to deny charitable donations to help former combatants. Do these cambatants not deserve equality.
    Yet republicans got prisoners out of gaol, and others get out of gaol letters who killed these Security Force combatants and their leader in Northern
    Ireland Martin McGuinness has met the patron of the British Legion on several occasions. So where is the Sinn Fein/IRA consistency?

  • Joe_Hoggs

    So publically funded children’s play parks are now denoted to one community over another?

  • aber1991

    If you know that many Catholics hate the poppy, why do you want it foisted on us? Are you trying to give offense?

  • Neil

    The ‘perceptions’ part is clearly at odds with McCreesh.

    Not really. I suspect SF recognise Unionist’s perceptions of the park name. You don’t like it, but that’s the way the councils are these days. Craigavon will fly their Union flag 365, while other councils will ban poppy sales. C’est la vie.

    I’m (obviously) going to draw a distinction between:

    We wanted to create an environment of equality and neutrality in council-owned facilities

    and

    SF advocate neutrality in [council owned facilities].

    The first sentence clearly refers to the poppy decision and nothing more. We wanted to create an environment of equality and neutrality in council-owned facilities is very obviously referring to a single event and the motivations behind that event. That’s why the word “wanted” is in the past tense. It’s not a statement of province-wide SF policy. Like I said, SF would remove every Union flag from every council and replace it with a tricolour tomorrow if they could. Ergo the supposed province-wide ‘policy’ of neutrality is a figment of your imagination.

    I cannot read into that sentence that SF intend to make all council owned spaces neutral – think about it. Do councils own kerbstones, street furniture, houses, parks and the rest? Do you think in Mid Ulster SF will be lobbying to send out lads with ladders and tins of paint to ‘neutralise’ the council area? Nope.

    I would also note here that I believe the SDLP will eventually do what they were saying they would do from the start and the name will be removed eventually. The shinners will be quite happy to make as much hay out of this as possible between now and May 5th, much like in mid Ulster where the SDLP have waved through the ban on poppy sales. Those middle of the road Unionist votes will be harder to come by for the SDLP in May, and that’s just the way the shinners like it.

  • Practically_Family

    I believe that in this case, and in others of the same nature, the findings in the case against Botanic Inns for refusing admission to the Cooke family will weigh heavily in future.

  • eiregain

    Those pesky nationalist weeds if only they wernt so green, on the other hand Chris cue bonor tac andzeno Alex and aber will continue detract and degrade any meaningful conversation that could be had In your under administered comments section.

  • eiregain

    Value is key, he was endlessly contributing to the conversation in an intelligent and witty way, this cannot be said for many others including myself. weighing pros and cons maybe Mick sees it differently to us as mere commentors. If so I would like to see him brandish the red cards more consistently, as this has turned into a Sunday league game. using one dude to set an example rarely works

  • The things which are singled out to be tarred with the equality brush tend to disproportianatey effect those from a Unionist background. Many more Union Jacks and Ulster banners are flown on lamp posts than tricolours, so on a purely cynical calculation, it would be advantageous to lose 10,000 triclours off lamp posts, if it meant losing 100,000 Union Jacks. In the same way that many more people wear poppies than Easter lillies. Losing the Easter lily is a price worth paying to banish the poppy.
    On the other hand, there are certain symbols more associated with the Nationaist community. This might be the use of a minority language as is topical at the moment, or a proliferation of sportswear that marks one’s tribe, worn and displayed at every non-sporting opportunity. Sinn Fein are oddly quiet in this arena, as they know they have the most to lose here from “equality.”

  • mickfealty

    Under Administered, yep. Time is money, and I’m short of both. I NEED people to get this and police it themselves.

  • eiregain

    Self regulation is a failed construct. We as a species will cheat when opportunity is given, and we will cause offense when no other avenues are available conversationally. Maybe employ trusted fence sitters to help enforcement of your abstract sports based philosophy.

  • Neil

    The things which are singled out to be tarred with the equality brush tend to disproportianatey effect those from a Unionist background. Many more Union Jacks and Ulster banners are flown on lamp posts than tricolours

    This is true. I live in West Belfast and there are very, very few tricolours hanging from lampposts. You can’t take down what is not there.

    so on a purely cynical calculation, it would be advantageous to lose 10,000 triclours off lamp posts, if it meant losing 100,000 Union Jacks.

    There wouldn’t be 10,000 tricolours on lampposts in NI. Sorry, but it’s true, we don’t do the same amount of territory peeing Unionists do. That shouldn’t be that surprising. Very few people in the world are into marking out their territory as much as the NI Unionist.

    In the same way that many more people wear poppies than Easter lillies. Losing the Easter lily is a price worth paying to banish the poppy.

    No one’s talking about what people “wear”. It’s only about the sale of the item in question. And you’re correct, I would imagine that lillies were not for sale in the first place on council facilities.

    On the other hand, there are certain symbols more associated with the Nationaist community. This might be the use of a minority language as is topical at the moment

    Funny that you should make the link. So, Greg the Geg’s comments about an Irish language act could be seen as a precursor to this? This could be viewed as retaliation for the refusal to countenance an ILA then? And in the instance that Greg’s already shot his bold on the ILA then Unionism doesn’t have much left to threaten us with there.

    “See yer Irish Language Act that we told you we would prevent months ago? Well, we’re still going to prevent it.”

    *Slow clap*

    or a proliferation of sportswear that marks one’s tribe, worn and displayed at every non-sporting opportunity. Sinn Fein are oddly quiet in this arena, as they know they have the most to lose here from “equality.”

    That’s just nonsense. What’s the plan? Gonna ban tracksuits now? How are you theorising that you would enforce “equality” on sportswear? And what on Earth makes you think it will disproportionately affect Nationalists? Try and bear in mind that no one’s banned the wearing of the poppy, just the sale of it.

  • Joe_Hoggs

    Where’s the neutrality at Newry?? It’s only neatral when there is something Sinn Fein want or as in this case don’t want that results in them losing nothing (the lillies were never for sale) but results in strong Unionist anger and utimately concessions.

  • Joe_Hoggs

    #Trolling – ignore.

  • mickfealty

    Is that your hand tentatively going up… 😉

  • I can indeed, James. Assuming, that is, that ‘decent people’ accept your starting premise.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Oh dear, eiregain! While I know just how rapidly a site that is not adjudicated strictly can degenerate into the kind of unproductive abuse that seems to be endemic to many of the broadsheet sites hosted by English papers, and I know that it is only Mick et al’s strong adjudication that stops this from happening here, I cannot but see the barring of Morpheus as a move that must seriously diminish every thread with the irreplaceable loss that rather brilliant nonchalance with which he constantly graces the site.

    I’ve been threatened with serious flagging by one other poster here myself recently, but would be never want anyone, even the most aggressive and occasionally (in my view) man-playing of those commentators who attack me, to be black carded themselves.

    As Joe_Hoggs says of his exchanges with Morpheus & Carl Marks, while from an opposite point of view, these are nearly always the kind of honest debate that turns entirely away from the deadly sterility of those mutual cancel out postings others indulge in, and I have always thought the Slugger is one of the few places where this is genuinely possible within the kind of energised debate that our history in the wee six ensures we cannot avoid.

    I beg Mick to think this through again, Morpheus’ exclusion from debate must be a tragic (and I really mean tragic, no hyperbole) loss to all of us who contribute to the site. Looking back over some other posts and mentally lifting his comments out leaves them thin and often seriously diminishes their interest. I know just how readily any de-railing inconsequence can grate on anyone striving for entirely serious on-thread political debate, but I’d feel that equally often Morpheus’ wit has been a catalyst for the energising of serious to-the-point debate on threads. This should not be lost!

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    Neil

    They obviously DO recognise the perception of the McCreesh name, the point is they don’t give a toss i.e. neutrality is NOT important in this case.

    “Failure to do so, perpetuates division and instability

    ” – straight from the horse’s mouth and proving to be correct.

    And for the second part, you’re kind of proving my point: now that they want equality because it now serves a purpose (to hoof poppies out on their ear) they’re now over it.

    If they don’t want a province wide stance on neutrality then that surely proves my point that they only want neutrality when it suites them?

    And for a policy that doesn’t exist it does somehow seem to be a recurring theme with SF, from Limavady to Queens to Mid Ulster.

    So why is Newry SF exempt?

    That’s my point:

    “Today ‘equality’ can help us get rid of a few unionist things, today equality is ‘good’.

    But yesterday equality meant that we can’t have our own way, therefore equality was ‘bad'”

    They talk the talk when it suits them, make a big deal out of it and then ignore it when it doesn’t suit them.

    “I cannot read into that sentence that SF intend to make all council owned spaces neutral – think about it. Do councils own kerbstones, street furniture, houses, parks and the rest?

    No one is asking you to, it says facilities. A council run park is clearly a facility.

    Perhaps Newry SF does not wish to adopt the stance of other SF councils on the issue of neutrality in which case I’d like someone to explain the disparity.

    Why bother saying “This is part of Sinn Féin’s ongoing commitment to equality.” when it’s clearly not?

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Not even slightly accurate, Anon! Morpheus is a complicated and sometimes contradictory contributor who is entirely out of category. Check out what Joe_Hoggs, one of the most decent and honest Unionist contributors on the site says about Morpheus above. It is important to recognise real moderate thinkers (I hope I’m not offending Morpheus with this categorisation!) rather than to slip them into one of the tight square holes, only suitable for what were so charmingly called “squares” in my own wasted youth, and certainly no place for a brilliant slightly anarchic “hipster” like Morpheus.

    As someone else from the Unionist camp whose posts I highly respect said about myself recently, you could not get further away from the concept of Troll than Morpheus!

  • mac tire

    Maybe I’m becoming an old cynic, Mick. Most political parties/politicians play a game. And, ultimately, we are all in on the joke.
    I’m coming more around to the view that there are “no such thing as principles, only circumstances.”

  • mickfealty

    Yep, I see that. On some level it is hard to pass judgement on politicians for being political. But on another it’s the surfeit of politics and political maneuvering that’s slowly destroying democracy.

    And I mean that in a far wider sense that these small minded disputes in Northern Ireland. The poor accountability of power to the people which it betokens may become a rod for all our own backs.

  • Practically_Family

    Because saying “it’s part of Sinn Féin’s ongoing agenda to annoy the huns” isn’t politics.

    Everybody knows that’s what it is though,including the people who vote for them.

    Remember – Not is spite of, because of.

  • Practically_Family

    Y’know what, really? You just think about NI politics far too much.

    Anyone who takes the time to contribute to a Northern Ireland political web forum, at anything other than a troll/wind up level probably overthinks the subject.

    You might not be able to eat a flag, but at least you’ll expire knowing that it was your flag you couldn’t swallow. And nor could themmuns!

  • mac tire

    Absolutely agree here. I was thinking along the wider sense also. Unfortunately, it seems to be the way the game is played now. And then we wonder why many people are apathetic.

  • mickfealty

    Believe it or not, I actually try to spend as much time as I can thinking about other things PF. 😉

  • Neil

    Why bother saying “This is part of Sinn Féin’s ongoing commitment to equality.” when it’s clearly not?

    Because saying “this is part of SF’s ongoing strategy to hand the SDLP enough rope and finish them off” while more truthful, doesn’t sound as nice. That’s what it’s all about. My predictions:

    McCreesh playpark to be renamed.
    Poppies to be sold at mid ulster council offices.

    The main thing is the shinners will attempt to prevent that happening until after May 5th to try and squeeze the SDLP of as many Unionist votes as possible.

  • Joe_Hoggs

    I was pointing out the flaws and inconsistencies in Sinn Fein’s proclamations – this was not a reference to you.

  • barnshee

    Er “next door” is the ROI

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    Well, when you put it like that…

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    Jonny-come-lately here also politely requests that Morpheus be reinstated.

    This place is all the more boring since the departure of Rory Carr, Harry Flashman, Comrade Stalin and son of Strongbow.

    We need Morpheus

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Indeed, AG! And that litany of names, and just how strongly Morpheus stands alongside those other major contributers, mostly lost to the Disqus Revolution, says everything about just how much the site needs his witty and penetrating input!

  • Practically_Family

    Not so much time as the depth..

  • Reader

    I remember the poster “ItWasSammyMcNalllyWhatDunIt” (Sp?) came back as “Moderate Unionist” (who was neither moderate, nor a unionist). I always had that poster in mind when Morpheus got going.
    I always thought Morpheus was a bit of a conundrum – turned up here announcing support for Alliance and non-violence, but consistently took up arms (metaphorically) to defend poor oppressed Shinnerdom; and, strangely enough, non-violence.
    Could we have him back please? I would like more of a chance to suss out the real Morpheus.

  • submariner

    What has happened to Morphs posts?

  • submariner

    ItWasSammyMcNalllyWhatDunIt is not the only poster to reinvent himself and make another appearance on the board, Mick is presently letting the banned poster Covenanter post under the name of Cue Bono despite him having been previously been shown the dreaded Black card.

  • submariner

    Mick i think people expect a bit of consistency.You continue to let a previously banned poster make posts even after i and SK alerted you to the fact . Im unsure why Morpheus was banned as ive been away from the thread for a while and did not see the offending posts.

  • mickfealty

    Yes, I could be more consistent and I could be more consistently present. Before Disqus we had our Yellow/Red system which meant a banning for two weeks.

    [That automation took a lot strain out of moderation.]

    That was deliberate because I wanted to signal that they preferred to keep people in. I’m also not in any way making a political judgement about what’s acceptable or not.

    Now we have Disqus we simply don’t have that capacity. He’s welcome to make a pitch to come back in, but I don’t have time to talk to people who consistently refuse to play by the rules.

    As for our friend Cue, if he was banned before under a different name, I’m willing to keep a close eye on him now to make sure he does comply with the rules.

    But Morph and I have a history. Frankly, although I find him personable enough, his refusal to ‘engage’ opponents in argument was becoming very tiresome.

    As far as last night was concerned, he wasn’t alone in going off piste, but he was by far the longest of long term offenders.

    The truth is that his blocking behaviours imposes a disincentive to people who do want to contend and discuss actual content.

    I’m certainly not averse to having him back. But I suspect he won’t be either willing or able to accept the conditions I would impose for any future participation on Slugger.

    The safest way to continue participating on Slugger is to stick to the rules. If I’m inconsistent in bucking people out, I am pretty consistent in my reasons for bucking them out.

    I’m all for tolerance. But sooner or later the road runs out for messers. And Morpheus was a prize messer.

  • mickfealty

    It’s up to him. Didn’t think it was MU/Sammy, though I make a point of taking people on the behaviours they present rather than on whom they are.

    In Sammy’s case since we have actually become good friends off line, even though I’ve banned him, I can give him a call and find out! 😉

  • mickfealty

    Damn, I was sure I had replied to this at length and in some detail, but it looks like it didn’t make it for some reason.

    The upshot is, he’s been chancing his arm for a very long time. By last night, I’d just had enough.

    Under the old system, we had yellow and red cards and even red only meant exclusion for a fortnight.

    If he wants back, he only has to ask. Although I think he knows very well he won’t like the conditions that come attached.

  • Reader

    The Orange in your flag represents the people who chose to put it there. I.e. Irish Republicans. If it did somehow *actually* represent Orangeism, it still wouldn’t represent me because I am not Orange.
    Everyone involved in (Irish) republicanism is/was nationalist. I’m surprised you might think otherwise. E.g. Wolfe Tone: Irish Republican, definitely nationalist. There are/were unionists who are (British) Republicans, but the Lily doesn’t represent them, and was never meant to.
    It is you who first referred to religion in our little discussion. Would you like to explain why you did that?
    If killing Irish people “for generations” is your criterion for rejecting a symbol which is actually intended to represent something else entirely; then you should first reject the Lily which represents people with a far, far higher Irish body count.

  • eiregain

    If it was, it surely wasn’t tentative. I would never think of treading that line as I sit so far away from the fence on so many issues,you generally do a good job Mick and even when we do see your partisan side and your called on it you accept/reject most things graciously. The same cannot be said for me. Maybe start a discussion on human cloning, a few more micks handing out kicks could be productive, could be…

  • Practically_Family

    This is the thing. An NI court has established that the poppy is so intrinsically linked with protestantism/unionism that discriminating against someone wearing one is sectarianism. Bad thing that. Unintended consequences.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Still disturbing to read someone so evidently delighted in the barring of a long term contributer to the site whose witty and intellegent input was considerably more stimulating than the usual dreary point scoring over “themuns over there” of the rigidly pre-committed.

    Neutrality is not simply a bluff, it’s entirely possible to desire the good of the entire community, a pretty common position with Morpheus in my estimation, and one desperately needed on both Slugger and in the wider polity if we are ever going to stop digging our communal grave in the name of maintaining exhausted and sterile mutually exclusive political stances simply because our imaginations do not reach any further.
    From your comments you appear to have been second guessing convoluted motives behind Morpheus’ postings rather than accepting his rich irony at face value. And troll? Really? Just read back over Morpheus’ archive to see just how very strange that sounds to anyone with a sense of humour……

  • SeaanUiNeill

    I did not see the actual “offensive” postings, Anon, but I believe from his long run of insightful and intellegent comment that the absence of Morpheus on the site will seriously diminish the richness and sheer fun of debate on this, the most stimulating of sites covering the wee six and beyond.

    But I note that you are in a minority of one here in supporting Mick’s call on this rather than asking him to reconsider the loss of such an important contributer to the stimulating complexity of the site.

    Unlike some of the others whose indignation at this has rather boiled over I all too accurately know that MIck and the other two moderators valuable work in reviewing content is all that stands between us and the sort of childish recriminatory mush usual on many other sites with political comment, but in his black carding Morpheus, I think he has made a very serious mistake for the long term health of the site.

    But all of this is well off theme, and I’ll not clutter the thread with any more response, I’ve made my point I think. You are, of course just as entitled to your one opinion, as I am to the correct one.

  • barnshee

    British citizens get support (if required) Others get handouts

  • Robin Keogh

    If required ? Lol…. seems to be a very long period of requirement

  • siphonophorest

    Disqus gives you the ability to delete your entire account.

    So if you are an intelligent, informed, articulate nationalist that is going to point out when Mick is peddling shite (OTRs, Welfare Reform, or whatever faux SF poutrage he’s ginning up). Then you are best advised to create a disposable Disqus account so when Mick can’t stand the truth and bans you, you get to swiss cheese the archived comments thread.

    Now if Mick is banning you for the right reasons then the loss of your contributions should not matter. On the other hand if the contributions are of the calibre of Morpheus’s, well…….

    Interesting times ahead 🙂

  • mickfealty

    Rory is still about, but likely spending more time with his family (an entirely healthy response I have to add if that is the case), Harry only ever flies in when he has time in his busy schedule and CS seemed to stop posting about the time we suggested he actually blog for Slugger.

    Don’t have a clever response on SoS, but may be we’ve not been writing the sort of stuff that brings his interventions. Maybe he’s getting fed up of people not paying attention.

    On Morph, I’m not stopping him from coming back. He only has to ask, and endure whatever conversation transpires from that request. It’s not me you need to petition.

    Go and pick a moment from five seven or ten years ago. You’ll find a different community on each occasion. Most people run out of road sooner or later and find better things to be doing with their lives.

    Only us ones who are too stubborn to quit, stick it out in the long run. Besides, as people leave if creates more space for new blood! 😉

  • Niall Noígíallach

    You’re right Mick, Morph and you do indeed have a history and as I mentioned to you earlier, it’s usually him getting the better of you in debates. Like most people on here, whether we shared the same point of view or not, Morph was one of the more neutral voices on the forum.

    It’s completely unfair to say that he did not engage opponents in argument when in actual fact, he regularly did. I think he put you in your place during the whole #shinnerslist thing by engaging and debating with you

    http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/03/02/shinnerslist-is-a-consequence-of-sinn-feins-selfish-misdealing/

    Perhaps everyone needs a bit of reminder of how having a different opinion from you normally works out

    http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/02/28/mark-durkan-finds-the-real-political-weakness-in-the-dups-and-sfs-position-on-otrs/

    The ironic thing is Mick, the banning of Morph says more about you than him

  • Reader

    I was thinking false flag in general, not the previous instance in particular. For instance, I can see that Sammy was a wilder republican than Morpheus, but less likely to descend into the personal.

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    Ah, I see.
    Regarding SoS, not sure if you caught it but he was on here recently.
    Alas, I fear his darkly humorous prose will never again be seen on these pages. (I hope you have cached files about the place?)

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Anon, when Mick asked for more Unionist posters a while back I argued that strong intelligently discussed support for the union was greatly needed here. We’ve had more Unionist commentators, but mostly of the pendulum swing against what SF says variety, who simply state the opposite as a knee jerk. I’ve even been tempted to start arguing Unionist cases (my own family is still rich with intelligent and committed Unionists, as well as Lundies like myself) simply in order to show how stating the Unionist case can be done, but luckily excellent and committed commentators such as Joe_Hoggs and Mainland Ulsterman and a few more are saving me the bother. I’d not want a bland middle ground neutrality that gets us nowhere, rather a respectful if strongly argued range of well thought out comment. Which is, amongst his forays into wit and even a few inconsequentialities that challenged even my own worst de-raillings, exactly what Morpheus was doing. The standard of debate on Slugger is usually very high, Mick et al sees to that, thank goodness! But every so often, despite what Mick is finding so difficult in his posting style, Morpheus drops a brilliant idea into a thread that makes it fly and gets important exchanges going.

    I’m very much an identity and tradition man myself, just check out my long term postings, and would be reluctant to loose any of the numerous polycultural streams of Irishness (including those varieties of “British” Irishness) that I believe would produce an extremely fertile soil if they could ever interact with a good will that took debate beyond knee jerk polarisation. But look at Morpheus’ older postings, and you will find numerous things which jump out from the screen, where he supports sanity and is fair to both traditions, and the site would be infinitely poorer if they had never been said. And now, perhaps, they won’t.

    Just adding,half ann hour after first posting this, that having just checked I see that Morpheus’ entire comment archive has been deleted. Siphonophorest explains how above in a response. So you’ll have to take my word, given in good faith, that his work was a most valuable part of the site. Alas, now lost.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Mick, while you’ve probably caught SoS’s “definite last comment”, just in case you missed it, its over on this thread touchingly supporting me against the charge of being a troll on the “After Dresden” thread from three weeks back:

    http://sluggerotoole.com/2015/02/15/after-dresden-new-play-explores-inspiration-around-the-founding-of-the-corrymeela-community/

    I should note that the two Son of Strongbow comments I replied to are now coming up as “guest”, but came up at the time as “Son of Strongbow”.

  • mickfealty

    Well named Reader. False flagging is just one of a number of breaches of trust that Morpheus indulged in. And he knew it well enough.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    Stand and fight for “equality” between the criminal and the law-abiding. Equal rights for violent rapist psycho gangs …

  • MainlandUlsterman

    “Parity of esteem for ultra-nationalist death squads”
    Hey, I’m doing SF’s work for them here … I think could be the next Danny Morrison here, I’m on a roll.

  • Niall Noígíallach

    You’re nowhere near smart enough for Sinn Fein lad. What’s the saying again? Oh aye, that’s it, “there’s more brains in a false face”

  • MainlandUlsterman

    yes, I can see they are a veritable Brains Trust …

  • Niall Noígíallach

    Some would say they have their heads screwed on much more than our unionist parties

  • MainlandUlsterman

    screwed on backwards I think 🙂

  • Niall Noígíallach

    Spat the coffee out a bit there MU haha. I tip my hat Sir haha

  • Zeno

    “It is just pathetic sectarian point scoring.”

    That’s basically all there is left now. Eye poke politics.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Indeed it is Zeno. What SF and both Unionist parties (and anyone else doing it!) need to be called on are these contradictions, where what may be excellent poiicies are proposed but then ingored when it suits a party. Or inconsistencies such as Adams presenting a policy for teh protection of women from abuse, etc. Its like finding the person who burgled you arriving in PSNI uniform to take the details of the burglary.

    In a situation like this all anyone can really trust is the commitmnet by politicians to shout down “them other ‘uns.” Anything that might be of real benefit to the whole (the whole!!!) community (the only reason anyone should be representing us at public expense) is an a grey area of contingency, to be done only if it is of help to the project of doing down the other side.

    There is a lot to be said about removing divisive symbolism, but not when its one law for us, another for them. As Mac tyre says below:

    “no such thing as principles, only circumstances.”

  • Glenn Clare
  • carl marks

    well I am suggesting that all estates both loyalist and nationalist be made neutral, now I also know that it’s not going to happen any time soon.
    Naming anything (play park, street, building, whatever) that is public property after someone who is divisive is not the action of people thinking about mending fences.
    I worked in Portadown for a while and every day I passed a mural of Billy Wright, it was a loyalist area but that didn’t make it right.

  • carl marks

    it would appear Joe that in this case offence only go’s one way!
    bear this in mind next time a shiner complains about a loyalist mural.

  • carl marks

    ah the poppy again, noted is the unionist outrage at the insult to the fallen of WW1, no mention of the fact that the poppy is abused and has been abused for decades by loyalist terror groups ( seems that is not a insult to the fallen of WW1, ) the poppy has been used as both a political and sectarian marker by unionism.
    I understand the feelings that the Easter lily evokes among Unionists, but unionists (in general ) seem unable to see the problems that nationalists have with the poppy.
    Like the flag on the city hall, after decades of Unionists abusing it to mark their territory they express outrage when nationalist’s question its neutrality!